Transit Service Proposals : Stoney Creek East

URBAN/MUNICIPAL

tee:
eS ee a

ee

—

MEMO TO: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT - STONEY CREEK

PROM: RESEARCH DEPARTMENT - H.S.R.
DATE: BPRIG-19, 1965,
RE: TRANSIT SERVICE PROPOSALS - STONEY CREEK EAST

This memorandum presents the general findings of the telephone survey
conducted in East Stoney Creek in Feburary 1985. The telephone survey
was conducted by R.T. Kelley and covered 308 households. All of the
normal steps usually undertaken in a Survey of this nature were
observed including a sample selection, questionaire pretesting and
ans the female head of the household as the interviewee. The survey
was designed to yield information on both demographics of the target
population and travel patterns related to their activitives. ) The
demographic data included information on household 2LZe7 ade
breakdown, vehicle ownership, driver licenses held and so on. Travel
fs included information on work trips as well as non-work Crips.

mane work trip information included days worked, work location, shift
types and the temporal distribution of the beginning and end of the
work period. The work trip aspect of the survey also identified
captive auto users. Information on non-work trips included Erip
patterns for shopping and social recreational trips of various types.
anis data, along with Regional trip generation rates, was used to
identify the transit market Ser one a te east Stoney Creek. Tables
Pontaining the survey data are presented in the Apendix to this.
report. Tables indicating financial impacts of several alternative
Service concepts are provided in the report as well as comparative
Pemancial data for existing and proposed transit services in Stoney
Creek. fc seule be noted Theat this report does tot contain any
recommendations regarding service.

Biome m OR! Go0e. G2 a.

is)

Po

SURVEY FINDINGS

Tabie A-] shows general demographic information: There are 3.23
persons per household. There are about 14 percent of the population
im the highschool student agé group, 5 percent seniors (which is quite
bow) ard most Cf the population (64 percent) is in the 20-64 year
group.

Table A-2 shows vehicle ownership and licénse ownership. On average,
there are slightly more than two autos per household and over two
licensed drivers in each household. General mobility would seem to be
high. However, 28 percent of the households report owning only one
car, which suggests some limitation in mobility if the single car is
im Wse Dor the work trip. However, a special vun of one car houséenold
data showed that there was very little trip surpression.

Table A-3 tries to address the question of restricted mobility. It was
found that about 28 percent of respondents did not have an auto
available when they wanted to travel. However, it was found that they
did have - and did exercise - other travel options. These included
Por CCL, travelling with Eriends <tc. Of the 2e percent. who said that
they were mobility restricted - about 11 percent, 61 Those surpressed
bPipes (5, > pereenc Of Uhe total).

Table A-4 indicates that most workers (85 percent) work full time,
work largely (73 percent) days and only 25 percent are “auto CaApLAve =

Table A-5 and A-6 are self-explanatory.

Cont -@ OM Do. ares

TRAVE IMPLICATIONS

The population of Hast Stoney Creek within walking distance of a
possible transit route is less than 3,000 people. When the number of
person (rips are getierated using Regional trip generation rates and
factored Dy the various elements thal go towards identifying a travel
Market, Che number of daily one way trips which might be candidates
LOB Grarsilt service <urn Out to be relatively low... The factors

Sere hae Potential transit usage include the percentage of the
population within walking distance of potential transit routes such as
wy. S and Barvon Street, the trip orientation factors, the times
during the day that trips were made, auto captive factors and

antvet pared Cransit modes wpiits. In short, the travel data. indicated
that there may De a.market for approximately 25 one way work trips
daily and about 100 other purpose one way daily trips. Those trips
Gould only be captured by a high Level, of transit. service.

ALTERNATIVE SERVICE PLANS

Four alternative service plans were developed in order to provide some
general guidance to the local decision makers. The service plans were
Priced and ©idership Was estimated for each alternative. The
alternatives included traditional bus services as well as a shared
Eide LAX Operation, tne representative alternatives are shown below:

Alternative (Cne

This Alternative consists of extending regular H.S.R. bus service from
route 55 and 55A (Stoney Creek Central). Buses would continue on Hwy.
8 beyond Jones Road to the Regional boundary and beyond the Levy Loop

om Barton Sirees to uhe Kegional

Le Ra. a

boundary. The service would provide for approximately 40-45 minute

headways and would operate between 6:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. 6 days a

week. The cost for the service is relatively high at approximately
$206,000 annually. Ridership in the first year was estimated to be
33,000 and in the second year about 46,000. Revenues were calculated

Be tne average fare for the H.s.R. and resulted in deficits ci between
Susu ,000 = 6290,000 for this aiternative., Details. of this alternative
are shown in Table One.

Alternative Two
thas ALwernacive 16 Similiar to Alternative One in that it would extend
service on Hwy. 8 from Jones Street and on Barton Street from the Levy
Loop. Rather than extending every trip as in Alternative One, this
Alternative would extend every 2nd trip, thereby providing a 90 minute
service between 6:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M., 6 days a week. The cost of
the service is relatively high because the same number of buses would
be required to operate the service as in Alternative One. The savings
in COSG are due Lo incremental mileage charges. The resulting cost. is
apoue S160,000 & year.

Ridership would be somewhat lower than in Alternative One and is
estimated at approximately 27,000 ae the first year and 33,000
riders, im the second year. The annual deficit for this service is

between $140,000 - $145,000. Details are shown in Table One.

Sontd On pgs 5:0.

258 oes ee

Alternative Three

this Aleeriative os a little different in that it proposes a shared
ride taxi operation from the Jones Road area on Hwy. 8 and/or from the
Levy Loop area on Barton Street. This Alternative envisions taxi
distribution to the low density Stoney Creek East areas for both
inbound and outbound passengers. Taxis would be scheduled to meet the
regular bus service at Jones and the Levi Loop The costs for the
service are based on an average of 2.5 passengers per taxi in the peak
Per OGs ine Was PasceniGere (per Gana qi che Grr speak... .vhe- number of

Chips and average Crip distance was calculated and costs were applied

Scere od sol ICU Pent Vas Voharges , ile. ta S2.00, drop charge plus
S/0 2 cm, LI SUM ni strative [ee was Lmelucded, Lo cover tne cost of
accounting and monitoring the service. The total annual cost is

estimated to be between $100,000 and $110,000. EVenm with the taxi
service, ridership was not estimated to be higher than that projected
For the first Alternative. That was 33,000 in the first year and
about 46,000 passengers in the second year.

The projected deficit is based on the same average fare structure as
Dhak Of. ihe Heo ks The taxi service and results in an annual deficit

operation of between $85,000 - $92,000. Details are shown in Table

One.

GORGE oe MOL Gn \Ose-5-

par o.

Alternative Four

ine -ianhal ALvernatwve consists of adding several "CCL. round trips into
vne “COL Rwy. —OeSservice patterns The (CL service an the Hwy. 8
corrider was studied and it was found that during the time when most
travel is being made in the corridor for work purposes, there may not
be enough CCL transit service to adequately cover the multiple peaks.
it Peetoroposed, Dasea on this review of (CCL operation in the corridor,
that additional round trips from Hamilton to Grimsby be implemented at
O70 Roms 7 oi ei0 VAT. |. Aso P Mo and “ss4o oR JM. “It sshould be moted that
CCL operates only one trip into Hamilton in the morning peak period
Which ARrLiVes in downtown Hamilton at S<155.° This trip exibits a dood
revenue cost ratio of about 63%. CCL also operates only one trip
outbound in the evening peak to Grimsby, leaving Hamilton at 5:15 P.M.
Md Texibativnicna good revenue cost (ratio of 76%. Thespropesed service
here would bracket those two peak hour services. Revenue miles and
revenue hours were calculated by CCL and the annual cost for this
Service Us "estimated to be $136,000. ‘The number of anriual riders on
the extra service is estimated at 18,500 with annual revenues of
approximately $33,000. Tie anniwtal Gerpeit foer“this service is

estinaved ta be around s2007000. - $105,000.

Cont Ga. on. po. (7s

Se fe ae

COMPARTOUN TOI WESE SlONE VY GREEK SERVICE

Table 2 shows a comparison between the existing transit services in
West Stoney Creek and the proposed services in East Stoney Creek. The
lable shows the key planning information for the existing and proposed
routes such as population served, annual miles of operation, annual
passengers and gross deficit. The Table shows that the Gross Deficit
per passenger is about $1.25 for the existing services in West Stoney
Creek. The deficits per passenger (averaged over two years) for the
alternative service concepts range from $2.23 to $4.68 or about two to
tour times as expensive as the deficit per passenger incurred for
existing service. The gross deficit per capita is derived by dividing
the gross deficit accumulated on a service by the population served
and is an indicator of the level of support a government must be
Breparea EG bay to provide a service. The delicie per capita served
for existing service in West Stoney Creek is around $22. The deficit
per capita served for the conceptual alternatives ranges from $33 to
675, These deficit per capita figures are high bécause the limited
croiiely Marten potential requires an unusually high ratio of transit
Service to capture the ridership. Finally, ene revenue-cost ratios
are (quate low for the concepcual Faso aees eee -~ ranging from 10% to
24%. he existing Stoney Creek transit service operates at a revenue

cost ratio of about 30% which is higher than the proposed services.

‘ ba
—
ia
T=
fl
1.
sat
eh
Tat wn Cl wD Ch a Pa Lo
1 Koi) (Ors Py ea tC. Ct uD
| ee “ © » . ® « :
ful ut of Wey = VS (atten) F
' tre ee 4 ty HH +e
E-i
‘es Co eS So as) uot
tae Ss Con cy es Ss
Fi rir wo o> Ee) oy
Lua a | Leh Jas se) G3) 43 L git |
ve cy o3 oi ect saat CRY sa
ca Ss ord rmdir & co Uses!
o> <> > «> oO 2D Lo]
Seay Keo (lets) oo ic
ek mo oo po fal — rt Gra
aa: heey ea mm co Go G@ wo
bea ie 2) La uy aS ay
cn ia ed med Hr ed
rz)
ti ra coos SS 1S os DS
£49 t Reh rsa cr SS oo (ee
os = ter Wey as co Gr it~ ae]
a 1 a <t “Tr CO No |
ve ra iy eto HC) ine)
al
ut:
RH
on i i Goa Ls) =] aed
a pa Cai | a (ea oe] qo
Bea is ets lea ues Cc ud
C33: Cs J ie ee gt eo ca
af . 3 <t tc ¢9 cq —
ti Eng
| ee | ‘
ja fa 512) mW
io ae 40 15 Se oe »
ny Fal 3 i er wo Un) ey wn
<b <I cay es fo eo Ke
peas tu a 6 oa we ga ore
>) ei ron tes tu on hu od tu
: (ay
fa: a)
coe 1-
4: corn Aa
Spi mw
res: yielst Gee 2 a
jee] a Le 1a)
C3 reece! ahaa &
cat Ww
OQ oun [os] Oo
rt ow co eed
lie es “no a& os He
' a &4 oo (| wn
rd fom) mm w WwW =o
“» is . un aod
re . 4 Whi} qa wo
ml t< + 3 me oO wn -
wh a Ut SS 2) |
a | ‘A ay ep os neat
mae fy Seated ot tH E+ c
nm Oo es wm =
Bal eked mw un a
ct a ar . nw
: (ee ree) ial ee a a co
Wit tant ot) sp) iret ae J
Cnt ws ree ci 7a m » Ey
Gt G4 ft. POD 1)
tycodt ue: =
Cay in) ra Po or ui) ee, =
ww ut eles que [ou
V1 om + 4 set) UE.
= as ee eeu Ke wo oO
4h OM we a = = =
ae Ae Et " wek Le as + >
inl aa t WG = )) t7 6S [se]
= r4 Oca od i= wu maw
Su Set ree ety tel VC Tt i, ee
Ay oe Ba oe ia ort fe er TY m het
Lid ee on wom ra
‘oom <<. Ow wo 4+ p aa Sa
iS | >a 185 mu oOo oO. Ww <x}
ASS Sc el w mo oun @) i ae
I~ <r na Mm UG (ep (eer
L Cine x4 sp Theiler wee fal TS! 4 ze
ee Se ah a Pye a ee ved a > 4
ian = Wie te et Sl > AH : 4
ae oy EN eS [ag St) eal Wm &
a fee tal “ WwW @ eA me m © TD <i
[ets aa aaa) facie a <i 2
, « >
r- a>) fap) =<

| %0@ oS Ces CUsLS 00°8L8 $ 007‘ 6€ =
| |
Aue 99° StS OG G6 | 00°620'T$ 00S‘8T 004° S¥ |
: | |
Z01 96° LSS G9°97S | 007029 1s 00S ‘0€ o0s‘9z |
| '
| |
%01 Terese g9°hS | 00°SHe'TS 004 6€ 009° €¢
Z0€ Sonus: ce 1s OO" TES *E$ 000‘ 78z 009*921 |
!
ices Oe Ot pr ae oe ee -_-— SSS i =
LSOO dO VLIdVO Yad SSVd add |
» LNAOYAd SV LIDIA | LIOTTA LIDTAad YHONASSVd eee
ANNAATY Ssous } Ss0d)'| SSOUD IVOANNV TVONNYV
ee 4 = —i. —_4+—__ ~

NOSIYVdWOD AOTAYYS

é..

+

COOL Zz pereys-h | +
| |
09€'T | Wa/WV-€ | im. Se
t
| : |
-069 2 synutw Qg-zZ | i"
|
ATU !
Osh zc | SanuTm Oy-] | ABNOIS Isva |
|

Aaa

8uTIStxg AYNOLS LSM

G4HAYaS
NOILV1NdOd

AOTAYAS

|
VaUv |

OML FIAVI

a.

5

AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE

AGE DISTRIBUTION

Hip 4s) cima ewe

DLONEY CREEK EAST

DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY

© © YEARS

6 = 12 YEARS

iA =o) YEARS

20 - 64 YEARS

TABLE A-2

SLONEY CREEK BAST

AUTOMOTIVE FACTORS

VEHICLES PER HOUSEHOLD

VERO UPS. REBU ELON BY HOUSEHOLD

DRIVER LICENSES PER HOUSEHOLD

DICENSE DISTRIBUTION BY HOUSEHOLD

P UNF ©

oO NO

U1 WN FF

CARS
Sa CARS

a

LICENSES

rH Ul
NIN BOF

WH oh HW XW HX WX

TARE A= 3

e STONEY CREEK EAST

MOBILITY FACTORS

HOW OFTEN DO YOU WISH TO TRAVEL, BUT THERE IS NO AUTOMOBILE AVAILABLE
a et re i vee etn Se ee ee ee eR pe os oy ee ee
SOMETIMES 28%
NEVER 72%

WHEN “EHERE 2£o NO: AUTOMOBILE, AVAILABLE FOR YOUR TRIP, WHAT DO YOU DO?

USE. HSR/CCL 3
TRAVEL WITH FRIENDS )
WALK i
VAN/CAR POOL

TAXI

ADON’T MAKE THE TRIP i

TABLE A=-4

SLONEY CREEK EAST

WORK DATA

DAYS WORKED PERCENTAGE

u 1%

2 4%

s 7%

4 3%

Bi B5%
TYPE OF OSHIP Lo PERCENTAGE
sip el cal 17%
VARIABLE 7%
DAY 73%
NIGHT 3%

TA BEE Ax 5

SLUNEY “CREEK RAST

TRAVEL PATTERNS

file taet DiC CMa C TINCT JCS Se ee on a ao a a a are er are eo ree ee fs
SOUCLAL

LOCATION WORK GROCERIES RECREATION

DLOnSeYy Creek fase 15% 6% 3%

Stoney Creek Middle 14% 45% 15%

stveleco East 3% = =

Red Hill Valley 15% 49% 29%

Stelco West 18% = -

Gage Downtown % = -

Kenilworth % = 6%

Downtown 10% = 20%

Cootes Paradise % - -

Stoney Creek North = =

All Over 5% = 27%

Outside HW 13% = -

Ee arate ON NOC a. bey oon onyh dey Volig: eter. eu ne ae pee or Cag seceadapan washed Sak eis oan ve ah sustoe:

LOCATION SHOPPING

Downtown/Jackson Square 12%

Limeridge Mall 10%

Hamilton Centre 20%

Hamilton Eastgate 36%

S C Fiesta Mall Uo

Hamilton Other 5%

Grimsby-Winona 3%

Burlington/Oakville 1%

TABLE A-6

STONEY CREEK EAST

LIME DISTRIBUTION OF WORK TRIPS

WHAT ARE YOUR WORK HOURS?

TIME : START WORK FINISH WORK
6.20 7A 2% -
7 - BA 23% -
8 - 9A 44% -

-10A 21% -

10 -11A 2% -

ll - N - -
N - 1P
1=2 - -
2 - 3P - :
3 - 4P - re
4 - 5P 3% 37%
5 - 6P - 36%
6 - 7P - 5%
7 - 8P - 3%

NOTE: LOW VALUES NOT RECORDED HERE

Pod:

oy
Ms

aes